Comments

"An Identity Document (ID) is an official document used to identify yourself. Every country...needs to be able to identify its citizens..."

I don't need "an official document...to identify myself"; I already know who I am.

Those humans who act as agents of the government do not have the lawful authority to force an ID (identity document) on any one who has not voluntarily submitted his, or her, self to the dominion of the government, i.e. who are not "its citizens", any more than a man can lawfully put a brand or ear-tag on a cow that doesn't belong to him.

These individuals are not possessed; they belong to no man, and they especially do not belong to any "it"; they are self-governing, and therefor any "official" identity documentation must originate from their authoritative source, themselves.

Anyone who really needs to know who I am need only ask Francis, the old woman across the road, the one who I built a landing and set of stairs for, because she had no safe way into, or out of, her single-wide trailer. I'm fairly certain that she would recognize me.
_____________________________

Question: Who forces any of us to use a social security number? I asked that because, if one does not use any of the government chattel numbers, for all intensive purposes, one does not exist.

nonperson noun▸someone who a government says does not exist ~ Macmillan Dictionary

nonperson▸ noun: a person* regarded as nonexistent and having no rights ~ WordNet*Anyone else catch that, a "nonperson" is "a person"?

"...having no rights"? But wait, I thought...

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men... are endowed...with certain unalienable Rights...”

"All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property"

And, I thought...

"natural rights [are] rights which persons[1][humans] possess by nature: that is, without the intervention of agreement, or in the absence of political and legal institutions. Natural rights are therefore attributable to individuals without distinction of time or place."[2]

And, tzo says...

"You can have a government, or you can have inalienable rights[3]. Choose one, but then please, do not complain that you do not have the other."

And, oh, the tie-in to the article? There can be no "theft" of that which you do not have.
________________________________________

[1] Corporations, which are "persons", do not have natural rights, because they are not "formed by nature"; they are "formed by human laws for purposes of society and government."

However, as Noah Webster appropriately, (IMO), points out in his 1828 dictionary, "we say, [there is] a tacit agreement or covenant of men to live under a particular government, when no [formal] objection or opposition is made; [we say there is] a tacit surrender of a part of our natural rights", "when [there is] no [formal] objection or opposition made"...and, unfortunately, complaining[1], particularly to each other, does not count as either of these forms of rebuttal.